Semi-final No.1 Northampton v Saracens

[chippieolamus]

Youngs is better at everything bar throwing.

 

[Peat]

Youngs is better at everything bar throwing.

And that is, imo, a narrower difference than many credit.

 

[91jmay]

Nah, DH throws all over lineout. Leicester mainly go to front from what I've seen. I think Youngs will do fine at WC though given time to work on combinations with jumpers, however if it is George off the bench instead of LCD that is a big step down from DH starting with Youngs off bench.

 

[Raggs]

George a step down from Hartley? In experience perhaps, in lineout ability, no, in scrummaging, not obviously, in carrying I'd bet Hartley doesn't have his pace or passing, George is often one of the top tacklers on sarries side and is often enough to guy rushing forward and nailing people. Oh, and he's better at not giving away stupid penalties or cards.

 

[jaffka]

"Now"... He had one before didn't he?

Does it give him the ability to do more than tackle?

The now relates to the time difference between my posts, the original one following the semi final and my later one obviously after the final. That's the semantics explained then.

As I said its a team game and players with different skills make a team and the player concerned in this little debate has a winners medal.

Still if you want to knock him, you must be one hell of a player...

 

[ratsapprentice]

So you think a back rower that can't carry is good enough at international level?

And specifically - "what England are missing"?

The thing is Jaffka... You don't need to be particularly good at something to analyse it - if that was the case then there would literally only be one person able to legitimately criticise players.

 

[jaffka]

So you think a back rower that can't carry is good enough at international level?

And specifically - "what England are missing"?

The thing is Jaffka... You don't need to be particularly good at something to analyse it - if that was the case then there would literally only be one person able to legitimately criticise players.

Quite simply playing players in their correct positions.

Feel free to knock who you want but don't get all up tight when you get called out on it

 

[ratsapprentice]

Called out on what?

 

[Peat]

The now relates to the time difference between my posts, the original one following the semi final and my later one obviously after the final. That's the semantics explained then.

As I said its a team game and players with different skills make a team and the player concerned in this little debate has a winners medal.

Still if you want to knock him, you must be one hell of a player...

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist. It's a simply awful argument for anything. It even points just pointing at the medals as an argument, which is quite difficult.

Not to mention your original reply didn't actually contradict anything Rats said. Winning medals doesn't make him any less or more of a one trick pony...

So, yeah, what exactly are England missing out on?

 

[Duck a l'Orange]

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist.

Dunno, reckon we could still take the mickey out of Alex Goode

 

[ZeroTwo]

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist.

Speak for yourself. I'm still going to make it I tell you!

 

[jaffka]

Called out on what?

I will accept that as check mate then.

- - - Updated - - -

If we refrained from criticising players and coaches better than us, this forum wouldn't exist. It's a simply awful argument for anything. It even points just pointing at the medals as an argument, which is quite difficult.

Not to mention your original reply didn't actually contradict anything Rats said. Winning medals doesn't make him any less or more of a one trick pony...

So, yeah, what exactly are England missing out on?

Why should I have to contradict?

As for your question, try reading my answer in full.

 

[Peat]

Why should I have to contradict?

As for your question, try reading my answer in full.

Because then you'd have been engaging with the argument rather than posting a bunch of waffle and saying it is when it's not. As it is, I have no idea what the hell you're on about other than you like making assertions and then not backing them up when asked why you did so.

 

[jaffka]

Because then you'd have been engaging with the argument rather than posting a bunch of waffle and saying it is when it's not. As it is, I have no idea what the hell you're on about other than you like making assertions and then not backing them up when asked why you did so.

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

 

[chippieolamus]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

You haven't really made any points. Sure, Burger is a great tackler and that is fine in Saracens' system, but at international level you need to be able to do more than that. An international team can't afford to have a back rower who does little else but tackle, they need other aspects to their game - its fine if tackling is your main strength but you also need other strings to your bow, e.g. although Lydiate's main role for Wales is tackling he's also competent at turning the ball over and he's a decent carrier.

 

[Peat]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

No, that's really not it at all.

To try and make this as clear as possible - your style of posting and debating means your argument isn't coming across at all. If you care about trying to have a discussion about rugby, then please actually make posts that actually make a case for something and engage with the posts you're replying to. If you think you're doing this - then you are mistaken.

And if you are neither willing to listen to constructive criticism, or actually make take part in a discussion... well, have a nice day I guess.

 

[goodNumber10]

Ah, you disagree with something and therefore class it as waffle. Very grown up.

As for your assumption, I conclude that you haven't read my posts, the few that there are on this subject.

 

[psychic duck]

You haven't really made any points. Sure, Burger is a great tackler and that is fine in Saracens' system, but at international level you need to be able to do more than that. An international team can't afford to have a back rower who does little else but tackle, they need other aspects to their game - its fine if tackling is your main strength but you also need other strings to your bow, e.g. although Lydiate's main role for Wales is tackling he's also competent at turning the ball over and he's a decent carrier.

That is simply not true that there is no space at all in international rugby for a flanker who high impact, high work rate tackling flanker.

Lydiate is a player of exactly that mould (and no he is not a 'decent' carrier either) and was part of a Grand Slam winning team and became a Lion. He might not have had a chance in other team systems, but he fitted in with the the system Gatland wants. Other examples include Joe Worsley who won 70 odd caps for England at international level, Strokosch with Scotland, and whilst I'll credit Dusautoir as a better carrier than any of those, he's another flanker who's primary role is as a tackler.

There's numerous players who've found a role in their sides for tackling prowess. Obviously it needs to be part of a balanced back row, but to say Burger, or players like him have no role at all at international is way off the mark. In fact, I reckon Gatland would love to have him as part of his team as an alternative to Lydiate when his form's dipped.

 

[ratsapprentice]

All those players do actually carry though... regardless of their ability - Burger doesn't.

He's more tape and steel than flesh and bone at this point in his career - if he had to make a reasonable number of carries (5 - let's say) and tackle like he does for a side like Wales in a 6N I wouldn't back him to make it through the tournament.

 

[chippieolamus]

That is simply not true that there is no space at all in international rugby for a flanker who high impact, high work rate tackling flanker.

Lydiate is a player of exactly that mould (and no he is not a 'decent' carrier either) and was part of a Grand Slam winning team and became a Lion. He might not have had a chance in other team systems, but he fitted in with the the system Gatland wants. Other examples include Joe Worsley who won 70 odd caps for England at international level, Strokosch with Scotland, and whilst I'll credit Dusautoir as a better carrier than any of those, he's another flanker who's primary role is as a tackler.

There's numerous players who've found a role in their sides for tackling prowess. Obviously it needs to be part of a balanced back row, but to say Burger, or players like him have no role at all at international is way off the mark. In fact, I reckon Gatland would love to have him as part of his team as an alternative to Lydiate when his form's dipped.

I actually agree with you. There is a place for a player whose main role is to tackle as long as they offer other things. Burger doesn't really. Dusautoir, Lydiate all have other things which they can do (not sure about Strokosh and Worsley, I've only really properly followed rugby for the last 2 or so years), whereas Burger doesn't really offer too much else: his breakdown work is poor, his carrying is poor, he doesn't really link play at all, he basically doesn't have any other strengths. That works in Saris system, but wouldn't work at international level.

 

[psychic duck]

I actually agree with you. There is a place for a player whose main role is to tackle as long as they offer other things. Burger doesn't really. Dusautoir, Lydiate all have other things which they can do (not sure about Strokosh and Worsley, I've only really properly followed rugby for the last 2 or so years), whereas Burger doesn't really offer too much else: his breakdown work is poor, his carrying is poor, he doesn't really link play at all, he basically doesn't have any other strengths. That works in Saris system, but wouldn't work at international level.

Well no you don't agree, because I just said Lydiate doesn't really offer anything else though. But he plays at international level, player of the tournament in a Grand Slam winning season no less, under a system geared towards his type of flanker.

Also I'm not really buying that 'international level' thing, such a nebulous standard. Italy and Scotland are 'international level', Burger plays for and against better opposition most weeks of the season. France are 'international level', yet Clermont or Toulon are considerably far greater sides. The truly elite club sides in Europe are all roughly on a par with best in the 6 Nations. Burger has shown he can excel in a team that has his role at the elite level.

 

[chippieolamus]

But Lydiate does offer other things, he can carry, has decent hands and is a threat at the breakdown. Your second point is a good point, but I think club sides are designed and players are brought in to play certain roles in the team, whereas at international level the coach is stuck with the hand he's got - he can't select players to cover others' weaknesses unless he has those very specific players to hand. Saracens are actually a prime example. We are 'more than the some of our parts', i.e. at international level most of the Saracens' players flaws are shown much more clearly e.g. Barritt lack of attack, Goode's lack of pace, Ashton's defence etc. I find I don't actually notice these weaknesses as much at club level because the team works in tandem to cover for them and has a very specific gameplan, because that's the way the squad was designed by bringing in specific players. International coaches don't have that luxury.

 

[goodNumber10]

The truly elite club sides in Europe are all roughly on a par with best in the 6 Nations.

 

[yaboyjj]

Well no you don't agree, because I just said Lydiate doesn't really offer anything else though. But he plays at international level, player of the tournament in a Grand Slam winning season no less, under a system geared towards his type of flanker.

Also I'm not really buying that 'international level' thing, such a nebulous standard. Italy and Scotland are 'international level', Burger plays for and against better opposition most weeks of the season. France are 'international level', yet Clermont or Toulon are considerably far greater sides. The truly elite club sides in Europe are all roughly on a par with best in the 6 Nations. Burger has shown he can excel in a team that has his role at the elite level.

Yeah- sorry don't agree with that- not even close. Toulon look the goods in some matches in the CC- up the tempo to int standard though, and old carthorses like Botha, Armitage, Hayman (two of whom were once greats- obviously) would be made to look silly and found out sharpish now (heck even the much feted Matt Giteau would look flustered)- its ridiculous to suggest that Burger playing against AP sides like even Bath or Norts replicates the caliber of opposition at int standard.
I would suggest though, that a disparity in resources at club level means that playing against most domestic teams, Sarries can easily cover up Burgers' drawbacks because they often far outgun the opposition in other areas of the pack (Vunipola brother to start with), and he is never really exposed because the playing field is not level between the teams. The margins between top international teams tend to be more marginal, such that minor weaknesses in a pack come under much increased scrutiny.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Yeah- sorry don't agree with that- not even close. Toulon look the goods in some matches in the CC- up the tempo to int standard though, and old carthorses like Botha, Armitage, Hayman (two of whom were once greats- obviously) would be made to look silly and found out sharpish now (heck even the much feted Matt Giteau would look flustered)- its ridiculous to suggest that Burger playing against AP sides like even Bath or Norts replicates the caliber of opposition at int standard.
I would suggest though, that a disparity in resources at club level means that playing against most domestic teams, Sarries can easily cover up Burgers' drawbacks because they often far outgun the opposition in other areas of the pack (Vunipola brother to start with), and he is never really exposed because the playing field is not level between the teams. The margins between top international teams tend to be more marginal, such that minor weaknesses in a pack come under much increased scrutiny.

What the hell are you on about? Your post makes no sense at all

 

[jaffka]

You haven't really made any points. Sure, Burger is a great tackler and that is fine in Saracens' system, but at international level you need to be able to do more than that. An international team can't afford to have a back rower who does little else but tackle, they need other aspects to their game - its fine if tackling is your main strength but you also need other strings to your bow, e.g. although Lydiate's main role for Wales is tackling he's also competent at turning the ball over and he's a decent carrier.

You are widening the demographics of this discussion to areas I haven't made points on.

- - - Updated - - -

No, that's really not it at all.

To try and make this as clear as possible - your style of posting and debating means your argument isn't coming across at all. If you care about trying to have a discussion about rugby, then please actually make posts that actually make a case for something and engage with the posts you're replying to. If you think you're doing this - then you are mistaken.

And if you are neither willing to listen to constructive criticism, or actually make take part in a discussion... well, have a nice day I guess.

An argument, contradict! You use aggressive words to attempt to reinforce your point.

My posts haven't broke any site rules, if you cannot understand them, then that's your problem. Jog on sunshine.

 

[Peat]

But Lydiate does offer other things, he can carry, has decent hands and is a threat at the breakdown. Your second point is a good point, but I think club sides are designed and players are brought in to play certain roles in the team, whereas at international level the coach is stuck with the hand he's got - he can't select players to cover others' weaknesses unless he has those very specific players to hand. Saracens are actually a prime example. We are 'more than the some of our parts', i.e. at international level most of the Saracens' players flaws are shown much more clearly e.g. Barritt lack of attack, Goode's lack of pace, Ashton's defence etc. I find I don't actually notice these weaknesses as much at club level because the team works in tandem to cover for them and has a very specific gameplan, because that's the way the squad was designed by bringing in specific players. International coaches don't have that luxury.

Have to say, when the argument "No place for a guy who does nothing else at international level" came up, my first thought was Dan Lydiate. I'm with PD; his contribution bar tackling is very poor, and Worsley near the end was even worse. Granted, playing him was one of the things that convinced people that Martin Johnson was insane, but he was there, and did have some effective games.

In general, no end of very flawed, yet very talented, players have made big impacts on the international arena - and that includes guys with phenomenal tackling and not a lot else.

 

[goodNumber10]

What the hell are you on about? Your post makes no sense at all

makes perfect sense, he's saying Sarries can carry a one trick pony due to pack dominance whereas most international teams can't.

He's also saying that PD's idea that the elite club rugby in Europe is on a par with international rugby in the 6 nations is ridiculous. People bandy this kind of observation around about the HC and the SXV all the time and it's completely unfounded.

- - - Updated - - -

Have to say, when the argument "No place for a guy who does nothing else at international level" came up, my first thought was Dan Lydiate. I'm with PD; his contribution bar tackling is very poor, and Worsley near the end was even worse. Granted, playing him was one of the things that convinced people that Martin Johnson was insane, but he was there, and did have some effective games.

In general, no end of very flawed, yet very talented, players have made big impacts on the international arena - and that includes guys with phenomenal tackling and not a lot else.

I don't think Lydiate is quite the one trick pony every one makes him out to be, certainly wasn't in the early days of his career - it's a bit of an old comparison but he reminds me of Richard Hill, obviously the tackling is the most clear comparison, but also his work around the rucks - small pick and goes and clear outs etc... but he's also a pretty decent linker and does get on ball.

What he's not is a carry the ball for 10-15 in open play kind of guy.

You do get limited players at international level - Barritt or Nick Cummins anyone? but I don't think Lydiate is quite as limited as people make out.

- - - Updated - - -

You are widening the demographics of this discussion to areas I haven't made points on.

Your point was that Burger was exactly what England was missing, which considering we have one of the best tackling backrows in the world is quite a claim.

You're the one who took it into international territory the discussion has progressed naturally to international teams carrying one trick ponies like Burger - Burger offers very little outside of tackling, he carries on a very limited basis and i'm struggling to remember seeing him get in on ball. He is what he is, which is an excellent tackling player - but i'm struggling to see how he's exactly what England are missing.

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

makes perfect sense, he's saying Sarries can carry a one trick pony due to pack dominance whereas most international teams can't.

He's also saying that PD's idea that the elite club rugby in Europe is on a par with international rugby in the 6 nations is ridiculous. People bandy this kind of observation around about the HC and the SXV all the time and it's completely unfounded.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't think Lydiate is quite the one trick pony every one makes him out to be, certainly wasn't in the early days of his career - it's a bit of an old comparison but he reminds me of Richard Hill, obviously the tackling is the most clear comparison, but also his work around the rucks - small pick and goes and clear outs etc... but he's also a pretty decent linker and does get on ball.

What he's not is a carry the ball for 10-15 in open play kind of guy.

You do get limited players at international level - Barritt or Nick Cummins anyone? but I don't think Lydiate is quite as limited as people make out.

- - - Updated - - -



Your point was that Burger was exactly what England was missing, which considering we have one of the best tackling backrows in the world is quite a claim.

You're the one who took it into international territory the discussion has progressed naturally to international teams carrying one trick ponies like Burger - Burger offers very little outside of tackling, he carries on a very limited basis and i'm struggling to remember seeing him get in on ball. He is what he is, which is an excellent tackling player - but i'm struggling to see how he's exactly what England are missing.

Thank you for clarifying that, good clear summary.

Agree with you about England not missing a burger/ tackler.

What we really miss if we are taking any back rower from the premiership would be Francois Louw. He should be English!